If this guy was such a big nihilist, why did he write so many books?

if this guy was such a big nihilist, why did he write so many books?

If this thread is bait, why am I posting in it?

read the books and find out

Hitler wasn't a nihilist retard

OP here, his name is Friedrich Nietzsche

Nietzsche hitler same shit both nazis

could you be a nazi if Nazism didnt exist yet hmmmm

Richard Wagner was already redpilling the krauts before Adolf was born. (He wrote a pamphlet saying the jews ruled the music industry). And Nietzsche was a kike loving faggot

Wagner's antisemitism was mostly cultural, honestly. He wasn't nearly as extreme as his wife Cosima, Hitler, etc. This is all very plainly spelled out in "Das Judenthum in der Musik."

>Yet another Jew have we to name, who appeared among us as a writer. From out his isolation as a Jew, he came among us seeking for redemption: he found it not, and had to learn that only with our redemption, too, into genuine Manhood, would he ever find it. To become Man at once with us, however, means firstly for the Jew as much as ceasing to be Jew. And this had BÖRNE done. Yet Börne, of all others, teaches us that this redemption can not be reached in ease and cold, indifferent complacence, but costs—as cost it must for us—sweat, anguish, want, and all the dregs of suffering and sorrow. Without once looking back, take ye your part in this regenerative work of deliverance through self-annulment; then are we one and un-dissevered! But bethink ye, that one only thing can redeem you from the burden of your curse: the redemption of Ahasuerus—Going under!

Very often "der Untergang" is mistranslated as "total destruction," but it's more accurately translated as, "going under" or "to dissolve in." What Wagner basically wants here is radical assimilation.

Wagner:
1. Hated the Jewish religion (in particular their God, and he kills Elohim in Der Ring)
2. Hated how many Jews refused to assimilate
3. But did not strictly hate Jews in the biologist sense.

He had many Jewish friends and a lot of them were responsible for giving premieres of his music.

inb4 people claim Nietzsche wasn't a nihilist. He believed it was true that life was meaningless but knew that you shouldn't submit to it.

>tfw you're ideology is such garbage it doesnt even follow subject-predicate

checkmate, atheists

>Wagner's antisemitism was mostly cultural,
what's that supposed to mean?
wagner denounced the tribal, nepotist jewish behavior and, as you said, how they refused to integrate with society at large. that's like antisemitism 101

Except for how in his later writings he said it may be necessary to destroy all Jews in Germany. And of course Jews performed his music. They were a professional class dependent on performing to survive in a region where they were at best mistrusted and at worst loathed. It was a matter of pragmatism. Wagner had Jewish acquaintances, he did not have Jewish friends. Later in Wagner's life his anti-Semitism began to border in madness. He believed that Jesus was of Germanic stock and that Jews as an ethnic group corrupted German blood through interbreeding. I feel that people who try to minimise his anti-Semitism are not familiar with many of his writings.

>Except for how in his later writings he said it may be necessary to destroy all Jews in Germany
[citation needed]

>And of course Jews performed his music. They were a professional class dependent on performing to survive in a region where they were at best mistrusted and at worst loathed.
Wagner could have chosen any conductors to perform his music, and he had more than a few favorite performers who were not Jewish at all.

>Wagner had Jewish acquaintances, he did not have Jewish friends
>Who is Samuel Lehrs, Hans Richter, Karl Tausig, Jacques Halévy, the entire Lehmann family, Hermann Levi, Heinrich Porges, etc. etc.
I suspect you haven't studied his relationship with most of these individuals, nor his letters to them, for you would otherwise not make such an egregiously stupid statement.

>Later in Wagner's life his anti-Semitism began to border in madness
Later in life, Wagner was literally going mad, yes. He was constantly assaulted by severe migraines and was under a great deal of mental fatigue. "Know Thyself," is primarily anti-capitalist, which I suppose can be interpreted as "Antisemitic," since it is essentially a moralist critique of the phenomenon, which is one of the gateways to Antisemitism as a full-on worldview. I'm pretty much with Postone on that matter, though I would stress the continuities of extant anti-Judaic sentiment as another necessary precondition - you can't fully explain Antisemitism by means of the value form.

>I feel that people who try to minimise his anti-Semitism are not familiar with many of his writings.
I can say the same about those who maximize it. Especially those who cannot even read his writings in German, since many of his works are horrendously translated.

His work was an attempt to convince himself not to commit suicide

>Here it must first be recognised that it is, by comparison, very difficult, if at all possible to specify with certainty whether we can speak of a German race, one very distinctly preserved and unchanged, like that of the Jewish race.

>Despite the emergence of these disadvantages, relative to the Jewish race, in the German race (if we should still believe in such a thing) that cannot seemingly be compensated for at all, we still believe that in order to illuminate the current [anti-Semitic nationalist] movement, the reawakening of something approximating the German instinct is to be encroached. As we found that it was necessary to refrain from the pronouncement of a pure racial instinct, we ought, in contrast, to perhaps permit ourself to investigate a much more elevated goal (that the present-day people can only be aware of in a dark and fully delusory way, as an instinct first and foremost) that is of nobler origins and having a loftier goal — that which must be named as the Spirit of Pure Humanity.

>We have to keep a hold of the fact that the efficiency of the noblest races' domination and exploitation of the lower races, justified through naturalistic terms, has established a completely immoral [unmoralische] world order..

>A possible sameness of all people made equal to each other through the intermixing [Vermischung] of every more similar growing races can only lead to an aesthetically ordered world if this sameness were conceivable when grounded on a universal moral consensus such as the true Christianity...

>If, by comparison, this element is assimilated [assimiliert] in this manner, so that together in community [gemeinschaftlich] with us, it helps to mature the development of a loftier humane [menschlichen] establishment, the most candid disclosure of the difficulties of assimilation [Assimilation] is surely more desirable rather than its concealment.

>[citation needed]
In his essay What is German he calls for an Untergang, a downfall for Jewish people. Depending on how you interpret the essay he either wanted every aspect of Jewish culture suppressed so that everything, even their blood is diluted to the point of non-existence (which is Genocide) or it is interpreted as a call for the Jewish people to be literally destroyed (also Genocide). The point being is that genocide is not that far from his mind.

>Wagner could have chosen any conductors to perform his music, and he had more than a few favorite performers who were not Jewish at all.
Often not. Many of Wagner's endeavors were enormous financial disastrous and he often had restrictions on such matters such as Parsifal for example.

>I suspect you haven't studied his relationship with most of these individuals, nor his letters to them, for you would otherwise not make such an egregiously stupid statement.
Wagner originally objected to Levi conducting Parsifal (an anti-Semitic play) on account of his Jewishness and only allowed it since the circumstance was forced upon him. Levi considered Wagner a friend, that doesn't mean that Wagner wasn't a really dickish friend and it doesn't mean that he wasn't heavily anti-Semitic especially when it was because of Levi's Jewishness that he objected to his conducting his music and his frequent attempts to have him baptized.
On top of all of this Wagner is well known for his complete unscrupulousness nature so that so long as someone is useful to him he will tolerate them as can be seen in people like Liszt and von Bülow.

Forgot to add.
>Later in life, Wagner was literally going mad, yes
Yet not so mad that he was able to write his best and some of his most complex music. Clearly at least his mental sharpness had not dulled.

>Clearly at least his mental sharpness had not dulled.
Parsifal is an amazing piece of music, but the libretto is easily his worst. So I think there's something to be said for literary failure, at least.

Anyway, I have work but I will return to this later and read the rest since this is an interesting conversation.

desu Wagner's views on Jews were kinda the norm in Europe at the time, in comparison to some of the anarchists in Germany he was kind of mild even

Antisemitism was not the norm but it was normal. There were many people who were not antisemitic though it was common. But Wagner's later beliefs about Jesus being German were not normal at all and he was made fun of for such beliefs.

wir war Messiah und scheisse

Nietzsche wasn't a nihilist. He criticized Christianity and Buddhism for being nihilistic, and defined nihilism as the emptying of value from the world. Nietzsche's philosophy gave value back to the world.

he never existed - his entire persona was fabricated by God himself

Because he believed *you* could overcome nihilism.

all Germans and discount Germans are nazis.

God is dead kiddo..

Too bad that isn't what moral nihilism means. Nietzsche's use of the word nihilism is entirely idiosyncratic so when he says he isn't a nihilist that does not mean he is not a moral nihilist which he was.

God never existed, faggot

What a pseud, who tf talks like that lmao

...

scheeeeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiisse

>hedonistic
>meaningless
How is the pursuit of pleasure any less meaningful than the pursuit of passion, art, etc.

Hedonism isn't aimed at any higher principle; it lacks vitality and nobility.

Why is pleasure itself not a higher principle?

>vitality and nobility
These literally don't mean anything. They're just words that sound good which you attach to spooky things you happen to like

>They're just words that sound good which you attach to spooky things you happen to like
They're only "just words" if they aren't representational of action; if they aren't enacted and embodied and executed by the will.
They can represent some of the highest values of a mode of being.
Seek impulsive pleasure and you give in to the sub-cortical cognitive structures and regress from man to animal.
Let's run a thought simulation. Apply the beliefs of nihilistic hedonism to group A, and the beliefs of Nietzsche/Evola/Bowden to group B.
Which group has a broader and deeper existence?
Which group has a qualitatively superior existence?

If you don't like it, then fine. Follow your own way then if you think it's superior. If you want to be an animal then fine. But I will be a man.

hello ey, have you ever considered the benefits of ridding yourself of postmodernism
>pic related

Hedonism isn't necessarily about *impulsive* pleasure. Seeking pleasure in the long term in a safe, pleasure maximising and sustainable way is still hedonism.

>broader and deeper existence
Depends on what they derive pleasure from. Tbh, this is yet another nebulous and essentially meaningless category since it has no strict meaning.

>qualitatively superior
How do you determine this?

Men are animals. But I find laughable your feeling of superiority due to your knowing belief in spooks, which you somehow justify by the pseudo-empirically
measured satisfaction of ill-defined objectives

Nah, postmodernism stronk. And what benefits would those be?
Tbh, I don't mean abstract concepts in general don't mean anything, but "vitality" and "nobility" can mean whatever the fuck you want them to mean, so they don't mean anything specifically.

Not that guy you have been talking to but all you have to do is take virtue ethics as an approach and one can lead a life better than one can through hedonism, whether that be the exuberant kind of the quiet Epicurean kind.

>Tbh, this is yet another nebulous and essentially meaningless category since it has no strict meaning
It isn't nebulous if you change deeper existence to being virtuous.

>How do you determine this? [In regards to qualitative superiority of a lifestyle]
That would depend on what sort of virtue ethics you practiced by there are many good ways of grounding it which is why virtue ethics makes up the big three of normative ethics in philosophy today.

tl/dr virtue ethics > hedonism

>virtue ethics
>dude just live this life I define for you, it's totally not subjective because we all agree on it even though I define what is virtuous based on subjective opinions lmao

Virtuous is yet another nebulous word to attach to things you like, doesn't mean shit

Virtue ethics is also the shittest of the bug three. Utilitarianism stronk

But not really because virtue ethics is some gay shit and it's for the untermensch who accepts other people defining their life even though theres no evidence to suggest that with virtue ethics they'd lead a better life

The soul crushing nihilism we experience is an oportunity to test how strong we are
If you manage to live a life with such a painful void and focus the power of your inner chaos you become unstopable, only chained by the mortality of our human biology
You faggots are unwise as fuck.